Mineralogy and Petrology

, Volume 112, Supplement 2, pp 697–706 | Cite as

Statistical approaches to the discrimination of mantle- and crust-derived low-Cr garnets using major and trace element data

  • Matthew F. HardmanEmail author
  • D. Graham Pearson
  • Thomas Stachel
  • Russell J. Sweeney
Original Paper


Diamond exploration focuses on geochemical analysis of indicator minerals that are more abundant than diamond itself. Among such indicators, low-Cr (Cr2O3 < 1 wt%) garnets from mantle eclogites are problematic since they overlap compositionally with many lower-crust-derived garnets also transported by kimberlite. Misclassification of these garnets may create “false positive” mantle signatures and possible misdirection of exploration efforts. Statistical solutions using major elements in low-Cr garnet (Hardman et al. in J Geochem Explor 186:24–35, 2018) provide improved error rates for the discrimination of low-Cr crustal and mantle garnets recovered from kimberlite. In this study we analysed a large suite of garnets (n = 571) from both crustal and mantle settings, already characterised for major elements, for a wide range of trace elements by laser ablation inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry and use these new data along with literature data (n = 169) to evaluate the effectiveness of adding trace elements to garnet-based diamond exploration programs. A new garnet classification scheme, initially using a major-element based filter, uses garnet Sr contents and Eu anomalies to help identify low-Cr garnets that are misclassified using major element methods. Combined with existing methods, our new trace element classifiers offer improvement in classification error rates for low-Cr, crustal and mantle garnets to as low as 4.7% for calibration data.


Diamond exploration Eclogite Kimberlite Logistic regression Trace elements 



We thank Yuri Kinakin for encouragement and support and Diavik Diamond Mines (2012) Inc., Juanita Bellinger (Rio Tinto), De Beers Canada, Peregrine Diamonds Ltd., Ekati Diamond Mine, Shore Gold Inc., and Slava Spetsius (Alrosa) for their support and provision of samples. We thank Nicole Meyer for her suggestions. We thank William L. Griffin, an anonymous reviewer, and guest editor Alan Kobussen for their comments, which greatly improved the quality of this manuscript. This study represents a portion of MFH’s PhD research funded by Diavik Diamond Mines (2012) Inc. and a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Collaborative Research and Development Grant in partnership with Diavik Diamond Mines (2012) Inc. to TS and DGP (CRDPJ 476392). Additional analytical work was also funded by a Canada Excellence Research Chair award to DGP.

Supplementary material

710_2018_622_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (232 kb)
ESM 1 (XLSX 232 kb)
710_2018_622_MOESM2_ESM.docx (270 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 269 kb)


  1. Aitchison J (1994) Principles of compositional data analysis. Multivariate analysis and its applications. IMS Lect Notes-Monogr Ser 24:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Desmons J, Smulikowski W (2007) A systematic nomenclature for metamorphic rocks: 4. High P/T metamorphic rocks. Recommendations by the IUGS Subcommission on the Systematics of Metamorphic Rocks. Accessed 9 July 2018
  3. Drake MJ, Weill DF (1975) Partition of Sr, Ba, Ca, Y, Eu2+, Eu3+, and other REE between plagioclase feldspar and magmatic liquid: an experimental study. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 39:689–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Foley SF, Barth MG, Jenner GA (2000) Rutile/melt partition coefficients for trace elements and an assessment of the influence of rutile on the trace element characteristics of subduction zone magmas. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 64:933–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fujimaki H (1986) Partition coefficients of Hf, Zr, and REE between zircon, apatite, and liquid. Contrib Mineral Petrol 94:42–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grauch RI (1989) Rare earth elements in metamorphic rocks. In: Lipin BR, McKay GA (eds) Geochemistry and mineralogy of rare earth elements. Rev Mineral Geochem, vol 21. Miner Soc Am, Washington DC, pp 147–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Green DH, Ringwood AE (1972) A comparison of recent experimental data on the gabbro-garnet granulite-eclogite transition. J Geol 80:277–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Griffin WL, Fisher NI, Friedman JH, O’Reilly SY, Ryan CG (2002) Cr-pyrope garnets in the lithospheric mantle 2. Compositional populations and their distribution in time and space. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 3:1–35Google Scholar
  9. Grütter HS, Gurney JJ, Menzies AH, Winter F (2004) An updated classification scheme for mantle-derived garnet, for use by diamond explorers. Lithos 77(1–4):841–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haggerty SE (1995) Upper mantle mineralogy. J Geodyn 20:331–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardman MF, Pearson DG, Stachel T, Sweeney RJ (2018) Statistical approaches to the discrimination of crust-and mantle-derived low-Cr garnet – major-element-based methods and their application in diamond exploration. J Geochem Explor 186:24–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction, 2nd edn. Springer, New York 745 ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huang J-X, Griffin WL, Gréau Y, O’Reilly SY (2012) Seeking the primary compositions of mantle xenoliths: isotopic and elemental consequences of sequential leaching treatments on an eclogite suite. Chem Geol 328:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jacob DE (2004) Nature and origin of eclogite xenoliths from kimberlites. Lithos 77:295–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson KTM (1998) Experimental determination of partition coefficients for rare earth and high-field-strength elements between clinopyroxene, garnet, and basaltic melt at high pressures. Contrib Mineral Petrol 133:60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krippner A, Meinhold G, Morton AC, von Eynatten H (2014) Evaluation of garnet discrimination diagrams using geochemical data of garnets derived from various host rocks. Sediment Geol 306:36–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McDonough WF, Sun S-S (1995) The composition of the Earth. Chem Geol 120:223–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McKenzie D, O’Nions RK (1991) Partial melt distributions from inversion of rare-earth element concentrations. J Petrol 32:1021–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nowicki TE, Moore RO, Gurney JJ, Baumgartner MC (2007) Diamonds and associated heavy minerals in kimberlite: a review of key concepts and applications. Dev Sedimentol 58:1235–1267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pearson DG, Davies GR, Nixon PH (1993) Geochemical constraints on the Petrogenesis of Diamond Facies Pyroxenites from the Beni Bousera Peridotite Massif, North Morocco. J Petrol 34:125–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Perk NW, Coogan LA, Karson JA, Klein EM, Hanna HD (2007) Petrology and geochemistry of primitive lower oceanic crust from Pito Deep: implications for the accretion of the lower crust at the Southern East Pacific Rise. Contrib Mineral Petrol 154:575–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Riches AJV, Ickert RB, Pearson DG, Stern RA, Jackson SE, Ishikawa A, Kjarsgaard BA, Gurney JJ (2016) In situ oxygen-isotope, major-, and trace-element constraints on the metasomatic modification and crustal origin of a diamondiferous eclogite from Roberts Victor, Kaapvaal Craton. Geochim Cosmochim Ac 174:345–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rollinson HR (1993) Using geochemical data. Longman Scientific and Technical, London 352 ppGoogle Scholar
  24. Schulze DJ (2003) A classification scheme for mantle-derived garnets in kimberlite: a tool for investigating the mantle and exploring for diamonds. Lithos 71:195–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shu Q, Brey GP, Hoefer HE, Zhao Z, Pearson DG (2016) Kyanite/corundum eclogites from the Kaapvaal Craton: subducted troctolites and layered gabbros from the Mid- to Early Archean. Contrib Mineral Petrol 171:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yaxley GM, Green DH (1998) Reactions between eclogite and peridotite: mantle refertilisation by subduction of oceanic crust. Schweiz Miner Petrog 78:243–255Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Earth & Atmospheric Sciences DepartmentUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.RJ Sweeney Consulting Ltd.East SussexUK

Personalised recommendations